Replying to Avatar mike

GM

My 2 cents worth of advice to Jameson Lopp:

nostr:nevent1qvzqqqqqqypzp6pmv65w6tfhcp73404xuxcqpg24f8rf2z86f3v824td22c9ymptqyv8wumn8ghj7enfd36x2u3wdehhxarj9emkjmn99uq35amnwvaz7tmjv4kxz7fwvajhgctvvfujucm0d5hhvvgpz4mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuerpd46hxtnfduhsqgr7p6tzk47mkflcc5cff6fp5uzltd2vnqgg89t9cdpvn0xja0zc3vt4gx2q

9e
twofish 7mo ago

My two sense offer of advice to anyone including mike:

GM

I would do my very best when making statements about other people or their perspectives to not make straw man remarks. This is difficult to do, and requires a great deal of effort, and yes incentives matter. Once their incentives are clearly define by the OP, begin to understand the boundaries of their arguments. Some boundaries are defined as fractals so if the fractal is understood only by the OP then I would accept that I need to put in the work before I can actually have a shared understanding.

Notice I made it this far without using the word "you". ❤

nostr:nevent1qqsyj9e5sjkywdwe5wmnpvlha976yd6ywrdwqezt6cal5aysycuh43cpz4mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuerpd46hxtnfduhsyg8g8dn23mfdxlq86x475msmqq9p24yud9gglfx9sa24d4ftq5nv9vpsgqqqqqqs3ej4ms

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Avatar
mike 7mo ago

When an expert talks, you understand.

For others on the journey, less is more.

9e
twofish 7mo ago

Who is 'you' in this context? I cannot identity that boundary.

Avatar
mike 7mo ago

There is no context and their is no boundary.

Read less context into this, not more.

9e
twofish 7mo ago

All I found was subjectivity. Did I miss anything?

Avatar
mike 7mo ago

You found too much.

Wine amateur: It has a wonderful bouquet, with a hint of cinnamon and oranges, the terroir is distinct and definitely from the new world.

Wine expert: That's nice.

9e
twofish 7mo ago

Wine is the objective context and boundary.

The expert has already made up his mind.

The amateur hasn't.

Does that sound right?

Avatar
mike 7mo ago

That wasn't my meaning, but is a possibility.

If you look less deep, then the amateur is trying to impress, the expert doesn't need to.

9e
twofish 7mo ago

I think the amateur is seeking approval from his audience by the feedback of the experience. By that urge to seek, is a consequence of not fully committing to it like the expert has.

The expert has already dug his hole.

Avatar
mike 7mo ago

OK, except for the hole thing.

I'm probably poking the bear here, but a real expert knows he's not an expert. He knows this, because he can see a vague glimmer of all the things he doesn't know.

9e
twofish 7mo ago

I think that may be a self referencing logical fallacy. I thought that was the amateur. So the expert is now an amateur and an expert. So how do we define the amateur if there is no boundary?

Avatar
mike 7mo ago

There is no boundary.

Unless you are a financial advisor who has passed the relevant exams and are now qualified to give billionaires advice on how to make money, while earning a little above minimum wage.

9e
twofish 7mo ago

That sounds like the Apeal to Authority logical fallacy.

I think A logical statement only works with the exclusion of logical fallacies. If I follow a mathematical proof and find an incorrect statement, the standard procedure is to hault. The logical fallacy would need to be excluded if it exists, and a collaborative effort helps to identify and clarify the intention.

9e
twofish 7mo ago

Based on our prior interactions, this sounds like a cognitive bias strategy to propagate an idea. I think this is a strictly political argument.

Avatar
mike 7mo ago

OK